Tuesday, January 8, 2008

James Kirchick's expose on Ron Paul's newsletter has just been released. Here's an excerpt:

Finding the pre-1999 newsletters was no easy task, but I was able to track many of them down at the libraries of the University of Kansas and the Wisconsin Historical Society. Of course, with few bylines, it is difficult to know whether any particular article was written by Paul himself. Some of the earlier newsletters are signed by him, though the vast majority of the editions I saw contain no bylines at all. Complicating matters, many of the unbylined newsletters were written in the first person, implying that Paul was the author.

But, whoever actually wrote them, the newsletters I saw all had one thing in common: They were published under a banner containing Paul's name, and the articles (except for one special edition of a newsletter that contained the byline of another writer) seem designed to create the impression that they were written by him--and reflected his views. What they reveal are decades worth of obsession with conspiracies, sympathy for the right-wing militia movement, and deeply held bigotry against blacks, Jews, and gays. In short, they suggest that Ron Paul is not the plain-speaking antiwar activist his supporters believe they are backing--but rather a member in good standing of some of the oldest and ugliest traditions in American politics.

Kirchick has gone one step further than anyone else has, by presenting actual scans from the newsletter.

So how will this effect Ron Paul's campaign? The Paultards will likely reply with their canned excuses and talking points, most of which have already been refuted in a previous article. They had a hard enough time believing that Ron Paul would accuse black people of being fleet-footed, they will never believe that Ron Paul would accuse MLK of being a gay pedophile.

Allow me to suggest an alternative strategy. This article is important for a number of reasons. First, it will bring this story to the mainstream, where it belongs. Second, it will shed more light on Ron Paul's incompetence. If Ron Paul can't even handle an 8-page monthly newsletter, then how does he expect to be able to handle an entire country? If Ron Paul can't even prevent his own newsletter from calling MLK a gay pedophile, then how can he honestly consider himself an authority on addressing racism within the entire country? Ron Paul lists racism as one of his main campaign issues. He has zero credibility on the subject.

Remember, as stated in the previous FAQ, the best evidence against Ron Paul is Ron Paul's own statements. The Paultards can attempt to explain away the newsletter, but they have a much harder time explaining Ron Paul's official statements when Lefty Morris first broke the story in 1996. Every time a Paultard begins to twist and squirm, always bring them back to this key fact, and don't let them change the subject.

Chances are, you will probably never be able to convince a dedicated Paultard that Ron Paul wrote that newsletter. Instead, change your approach: If Ron Paul didn't write the newsletter, then how do you explain how he first responded? If Ron Paul is really fit to serve as president, then why hasn't he shown better leadership? These questions are just as important.